nil

Thanks jaclaz, told you I wasn't qualified. (My CD was purchased seperately from a supplier so I always imagined I had a "retail" version. I'll dob him in to Microcop immediately ) I appreciate that the example I gave may not hold true for some (or even many) but it's very likely that subsequent clauses relating to redistribution and seperation of components is common to all EULA - that Microsoft has the right to include Win2k components in WinME has no bearing on anyone else's right to distribute those components even if they (and all recipients) legally owned copies of Win2k. Of course even those parts only relate to components distributed on the CD - some files available for download from Microsoft have their own terms of use, and many patches/upgrades don't seem to have any conditions attached. (I have noticed a few in the past that explicitly point back to the parent EULA but not many.) In retrospect the words I used to describe how Gape's service packs might be considered were probably ill-chosen, but I reckon the guts of what I was trying to say still holds true. It was the distribution aspect that I was commenting on with the service packs, not usage, and had more to do with questioning the benefits of doing so rather than potential legal negatives. Like I said it was a little off topic, it was just convenient to mention it at the time. All just my opinion of course.

Given that was my first post here I should've said hello. Hello And just to avoid confusion, Axcel216 is now known as MDGx, though as to which one made the suggestions I'm not rightly sure

Not that I'm qualified to speak on the matter but I'm sure the situation is not that simple or that difficult. Both the Win98SE and WinME EULA, for example, clearly states "If the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is not accompanied by a new computer system or computer system component, you may not use or copy the SOFTWARE PRODUCT." That's the letter of the law, and it's unlikely that local laws will override the agreement that you accept (implicitly or explicitly) when you install either OS. So technically most users are running "illegal" Win98SE systems these day, and while it mightn't be illegal to sell a copy of the WinME CD without an accompanying bit of hardware, the buyer wouldn't lawfully be able to use the software. The spirit of the law, how the agreement is likely to be enforced, is another matter entirely. Microsoft as yet haven't take issue with the redistribution of certain standalone utilities distributed on the WinME CD, like Defrag and Scandisk (and there's little chance of Microsoft being that petty. @pple®© on the other hand... ) but distributing OS components is probably going to be frowned apon. Not necessarily for obvious commercial reasons (it would be unlikely to hurt WinME sales much) but due to the support implications of having hybrid systems around and the impact on Microsoft's reputation if those systems started falling over (or worked better ) after Microsoft updates and other software is installed in future. And that's fair enough I reckon. Axcel216's suggestions are fine for hardcore users that are willing to deal with the consequences of mixing 98SE and ME components (those people are less likely to bombard the net with "hate" if issues arise after installing upgrades) but are not for the casual user. @Gape. Slightly off topic here but I think your service packs might be considered borderline. The ME components you currently distribute are basically simple drop-in replacements unlikely to cause the user future problems, and Microsoft probably won't stomp on them, but I certainly wouldn't consider adding any more. The need to include Windows ME components comes down to your definition of "service pack". I'm sure many would disagree with my definition, but I see a service pack as upgrades for original OS components/utilities (with official versions where they exist and with freely redistributable [not necessarily public domain] ones when they don't), and corrections for flaws/oversights with the original OS. So including a new "task manager" in a Win98SE service pack is fine as the original doesn't show all running tasks, but notepad, however simple it might be, isn't "broken" and needn't be replaced (alternative text editors are better suited to inclusion in a seperate "Win98SE Enhancement Pack"). So even if it were perfectly legal I still wouldn't use the ME icon dll for example - it changes though arguably doesn't enhance the original system - some even feel the rounded style of the ME icons look out of place on Win98SE systems. (I'm not suggesting you excude all icon changes by the way, a replacement batch file icon for example might be worth considering). Maybe that type of filtering process won't be popular but at the very least it'll help reduce the size of the download.